Public Relations Tactics That Can Help Brands Win Olympic Gold
The 2026 Winter Olympics, officially known as the Milano Cortina 2026 Olympic Winter Games, will take place from February 6 through February 22, 2026.
There are important lessons brands that have sponsored past Olympic Games should reflect on as they develop plans for future Games.
Based on my experience working around the Olympics, perhaps the most important lessons are these:
Where the Olympics go, controversy and critical media coverage tend to follow.
It makes little difference whether the Games are held in democratic or authoritarian countries.
And sponsors are not immune from negative attention and should plan accordingly.
From the moment a host city is announced through the opening ceremonies, media focus often centers less on athletes and more on the broader issues surrounding the Games, many of them critical. Environmental concerns, displacement of residents, human rights questions, public spending, and governance issues have followed the Olympics for decades.
History offers multiple examples. Public opposition led Denver to withdraw from hosting the 1976 Winter Games. In Boston, public sentiment contributed to the city declining to pursue the 2028 Summer Olympics. Los Angeles, which will host the 2028 Games, has already seen organized opposition tied to housing, cost overruns, and community impact. Italy, the site of the 2026 Winter Games, has also faced scrutiny as preparations move forward.
During my involvement with Olympic-related communications, I often saw brand promotions focus heavily on visibility and activation while giving insufficient attention to crisis preparedness. In today’s environment, protecting a brand from being associated with negative news can be as important as generating positive earned media.
When Brands Become Part of the Story
There are numerous examples where sponsors found themselves drawn into controversy surrounding the Games.
During the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, several brands adjusted or scaled back their promotional efforts amid coverage of Russia’s laws affecting LGBTQ+ communities.
Many sponsors muted their presence around the Tokyo Games, ultimately held in 2021, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and public concern in Japan.
The 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics prompted criticism from human rights organizations and U.S. policymakers, with some sponsors questioned publicly about their involvement.
In hearings held ahead of the Beijing Games, members of Congress asked representatives from several major corporations how they reconciled public commitments to human rights with sponsorship of the Olympics. In many cases, companies responded by emphasizing support for athletes rather than addressing broader concerns.
That approach, often summarized as “we just follow the athletes,” has become a default response. It is also one that increasingly falls flat.
It would be comforting to believe that awarding the Games to democratic nations would eliminate controversy. Experience shows otherwise. As the start of both the 2026 and 2028 Games approaches, protest activity and media scrutiny are expected to intensify, as they have with nearly every Olympics in recent memory.
Preparing for Protest and Scrutiny
Brands that align themselves with the Olympics understand, or should understand, that they may become targets of criticism from activist groups. What history suggests is that many sponsors still lack a thoughtful, proactive strategy for responding.
With the opening ceremonies less than a year away, there is still time for sponsors to prepare. Several steps can help.
Olympic account teams should include senior communications professionals with crisis experience. Not every negative article requires a response, and in some cases restraint is the best option.
If criticism persists, sponsors should acknowledge the concerns being raised while clearly explaining why they believe the Olympic Games can be a force for positive impact. This response should go beyond prepared statements and social posts. Where possible, direct engagement with activist groups can be constructive.
Sponsors can also demonstrate that participation in the Olympics does not equate to dismissing criticism by creating space on their own platforms for thoughtful discussion, including perspectives from advocacy groups. Appointing an internal ombudsman or point person to maintain dialogue with activists before and during the Games can further signal seriousness and transparency.
Sponsors should also make clear their expectation that peaceful protest in host countries is respected.
None of these steps guarantees immunity from criticism. What they can do, however, is position brands as thoughtful, responsible participants rather than silent bystanders. That posture can generate positive coverage and extend the value of Olympic sponsorship beyond the closing ceremonies, when U.S. media attention typically shifts back to domestic sports.
Standing Apart in a Crowded Field
One challenge of sponsoring mega sporting events is saturation. With so many sponsors involved, consumers often confuse brands and messages. Olympic sponsorships, like Super Bowl advertising, can blur together.
Taking a leadership position on issues surrounding the Games offers sponsors a way to stand apart. These efforts need not be expensive, but they do require a willingness to think beyond traditional activation playbooks.
A Historical Reminder
For context, it is worth remembering that controversy around the Olympics is not new. In October 1968, days before the Mexico City Games began, government forces opened fire on student protesters in what became known as the Tlatelolco Massacre. While estimates of those killed vary, the event remains one of the most tragic episodes associated with the Olympic movement.
At the time, Olympic officials chose not to publicly address the violence, insisting the Games would proceed. The episode serves as a reminder that the Olympics have long existed alongside political and social conflict, whether acknowledged or not.
For brands, the lesson is clear. Sponsoring the Olympics means engaging with a global event that carries both opportunity and risk. How sponsors prepare for and respond to that reality will increasingly define whether their Olympic investment pays dividends beyond visibility alone.
Editor’s Note: This article is an opinion piece. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of CommPRO or its editorial staff.
